ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the differences in insertion gains from the first fit to generic prescriptions of hearing aids can predict the self-reported hearing aid (HA) outcomes for first-time and experienced HA users. DESIGN: This was a prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 885 first-time and 330 experienced HA users with a valid real-ear measurement on both ears and answers to the abbreviated version of the Speech, Spatial, and Quality of Hearing (SSQ12) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaires. RESULTS: K-means clustering of gain differences between individual real-ear insertion gain to three generic gain prescriptions (NAL-NL2, NAL-RP, and one-third gain rules) was performed. The gain difference at higher frequencies generally differentiated the clusters. The experienced users in the cluster with fittings closest to NAL-NL2 and NAL-RP prescription were found to exhibit a higher IOI-HA Factor 1 score (representing the overall benefit of the hearing aid use). The gain differences to generic prescription did not affect other self-reported outcomes for first-time and experienced HA users. CONCLUSION: The experienced HA users with minimal gain deviations from generic prescriptions reported better self-perceived benefits than users with larger deviations. However, this was not apparent in first-time users.
Subject(s)
Hearing Aids , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural , Humans , Self Report , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/rehabilitation , Prescriptions , Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresABSTRACT
(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish 'Better hEAring Rehabilitation' (BEAR) project recently developed methods for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to-noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current 'best practice' procedure based on the NAL-NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.
ABSTRACT
Many documents describe standardized methods and standard equipment requirements in the field of audiology and hearing aids. These standards will ensure a uniform level and a high quality of both the methods and equipment used in audiological work. The standards create the basis for measuring performance in a reproducible manner and independent from how and when and by whom parameters have been measured. This article explains, and focuses on, relevant acoustic and electromagnetic compatibility parameters and describes several test systems available.